Trending
YOUNGSTOWN -- Two men set for trial Sept. 21 in the Oct. 17, 2024, bizarre shooting death of Reynaldo Hernandez, 24, at the home of co-defendant Andre K. Bailey on Bott Street on the East Side are are asking Mahoning County Common Pleas Court Judge R. Scott Krichbaum to try them separately.
On Aug. 17, Eddie Winphrie, 43, asked to be tried separately from co-defendant Vincent Marbley, 61, saying that if Winphrie testified, Winphrie's testimony "would tend to implicate" Marbley as to Marbley's "potential complicity" in the case.
Winphrie's filing states that being tried together would "destroy" the right to have a fair trial as guaranteed in the U.S. and Ohio Constitutions and "would allow a jury to consider the co-defendant's criminal liability and associate this defendant with the potential complicity of his co-defendant."
Marbley's attorney on Aug. 21 filed a much longer motion also asking that Krichbaum separate the trials, citing a criminal rule that states that "If it appears that a defendant or the state (prosecutors and law enforcement) are harmed by joining the defendants in one trial, a judge 'shall order' separate trials or whatever is necessary."
The Marbley filing, by attorney Lou DeFabio, states that prosecutors are alleging Winphrie and Bailey "were present at Bailey's residence" on Bott Street when Hernandez was shot. Although there were numerous videos taken from the inside and outside of the residence, "no video appears to show the actual shooting," DeFabio stated.
Prosecutors did not allege which person was the actual shooter, and neither Marbley nor Bailey made a statement to the Youngstown Police Department, the filing states.
DeFabio noted that Winphie indicated in his filing that his testimony at trial would implicate Marbley in the crimes, and "For his part, (Marbley) plans to offer witness testimony implicating Winphrie," DeFabio stated.
BIZARRE FACTS
Bailey went on trial in early 2025 in the Hernandez killing and was convicted of aggravated murder and other crimes. He was sentenced to a life prison sentence and appealed unsuccessfully. In appeal documents, prosecutors summarized the facts presented at the trial, starting with the first witness, an Amazon driver who was on the front porch of Bailey's Bott Street home at about 6:20 p.m. delivering a package when gunfire erupted in the house.
The driver returned to his truck quickly. But a person backing out of the driveway, also in a hurry, hit the truck on the way out.
The details provided by 11 surveillance video cameras also were surreal. After the victim was shot inside the house, he went outside and collapsed in the driveway struggling to stay alive, according to testimony from Bailey's trial.
He was on the driveway about 10 minutes before men from the home picked him up, put him in a car and drove away. His body would be found the next day in the Mount Hope Veterans Memorial Cemetery not far away.
In addition to Bailey, Winphrie and Marbley, several other men were charged in the case because they played some role in cleaning up the house after the shooting or helped drive the victim from the scene.
Assistant Prosecutor John Juhasz said during closing arguments in Bailey's trial that someone finished cleaning up the blood at Bailey's house 90 seconds before the first Youngstown police officers arrived. When they arrived, Hernandez's body was gone and so were at least two people and two cars that had been there earlier.
After they drove away, two men convicted of lesser crimes "poured bleach on areas of the driveway in areas where the victim was lying.
Bailey was still at the home when officers arrived. Juhasz said in his closing argument in the trial the reason Bailey was still there is because he was wearing an electronically monitored ankle bracelet as a result of a criminal case in another county.
MORE REASONS TO SEPARATE
DeFabio's filing states that one of the biggest problems for defendants being tried together is that they will generally have different "theories and arguments as to what the evidence shows." Prosecutors, however, have "one theory. And as a trial wears on, it becomes readily apparent that the (prosecution) version is the only unified and consistent presentation," DeFabio stated.
When defendants present defenses that oppose each other, that can harm "co-defendants to such a degree that they are denied a fair trial," DeFabio added.
DeFabio stated that Winphrie "has indicated that he will present testimony that (Marbley) took part in the aggravated murder offenses. (Marbley) has denied participating in these crimes. (Marbley) will present evidence that, in fact, it was Winphrie who committed these offenses."
DeFabio said he thinks it's likely that the attorneys for both defendants will "seek to accentuate" testimony that helps their client.
DeFabio added that, "In short, a joint trial would result in a violation of (Marbley's) state and federal constitutional rights to a fair trial as guaranteed by the Due Process Clause of the Ohio and United States Constitutions."
Furthermore, if the two men were tried together, there would be an imbalance in the number of peremptory challenges the prosecution could use during jury selection -- eight for the prosecution and four for each defendant.
"The net effect of having eight peremptory challenges would be that the (prosecution) could 'stack the deck' in terms of selecting a jury, DeFabio argued.